Kolkata Court April 1999 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Kanhaiyalal Saraf Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1999
Reported in: (1999)2CALLT291(HC)
B.M. Mitra, J. 1. The instant writ petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage without user of any affidavit since in view of emphatic assertion made by Mr. Sen appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 6 the matter docs not brook for any delay. Accordingly, some written instructions were put forward before this court and the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State has also put forward his written instructions. In view of non-user of any affidavit, there has been no occasion for traversing the material allegations contained in the instant petition and, as such any of the allegations contained therein will not be treated as to have been admitted. The entire matter is being insisted upon for being heard at the stage of 'Listed Motion' since extension of interim order has been opposed by the contesting respondents. This court has become a party to pass initial interim orders and it will refer to the reasons which have prompted this court at the material point of time t...
Khaitan (India) Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1999
Reported in: (1999)2CALLT478(HC)
1. This appeal is directed against a Judgment and order dated 18th March, 1999 passed by a learned single Judge of this court in A.S.T. No. 641 of 1999 whereby and whereunder the writ application filed by the appellants herein had been dismissed on the ground of existence of alternative remedy as also lack of territorial Jurisdiction on the part of this court.2. The respondent herein had filed an application before the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission, Delhi, inter alia, on the ground that the appellant herein has taken recourse to unfair trade practices.3. In the said proceeding an application for Injunction has been filed which had been granted by an order dated 8th March, 1999. Questioning the said order a writ application was filed and upon dispensing with the requirement of Rule 27 of the writ Rules framed by this court, the learned trial Judge passed interim order in favour of the writ petitioner on 11th March, 1999. The respondents having been noticed, raise...
State Bank of India Vs. S.M. Oil Extraction Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1999
Reported in: [2002]108CompCas85(Cal)
Ronojit Kumar Mitra, J.1. In order to adjudicate the disputes between the parties in this application, the court was to consider whether the non obstante clauses as contained in the Companies Act, 1956, and the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, were conflicting, and if so then which was to prevail. For the sake of brevity, I shall in this order refer to the two enactments as the 'Companies Act' and the 'Debt Recovery Act', respectively.2. It was contended by the advocate on behalf of the petitioner, that the suit which was now pending before this court, ought to be transferred to the Debt Recovery Tribunal, in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 31(1) of the Debt Recovery Act. The Debt Recovery Tribunal, in this order shall in short be referred to as 'the Tribunal'. It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that the Debt Recovery Act was a later enactment and the non obstante clause contained in it would be applicable in preference to ...
Dr. Ramesh C. Vaish and ors. Vs. Banwarilal Jaipuria and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)ARBLR241(Cal)
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 10-8-1994 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder the application filed by the appellant purported to be under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure was dismissed. 2. The fact of the matter briefly stated is as follows : A partnership firm in the name of Anandram Gajadhar was established as far back as in 1924. Deeds of reconstitution of partnership were executed by the parties from time to time and admittedly the last deed of partnership was executed on 7-3-1940. The partnership firm consisted of seven partners, namely, Gajadhar Jaipuria, Puranmal Jaipuria, Mangturam Jaipuria, Vikram Jaipuria, Motilal Jaipuria, Ramnarayan Ojha and Shiv Narayan Poddar. 3. On or about 15-12-1941, an agreement was entered into by and between the partners of the said partnership firm wherein it had been stated that any work done or to be done or will be donein the name of any partner or partners or any other...
Gita Bhattacharjee (Smt.) and ors. Vs. South Bengal State Transport Co ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-06-1999
Reported in: [2000(87)FLR693],(2000)IILLJ377Cal
D.P. Kundu, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of judgment and order dated September 24, 1991 passed by MAHITESH majUMDAR, J. as he then was in Civil Order No. 9654 (W) of 1990 to the extent the said judgment and order permitted the drawal of fresh proceedings and directed that the appellant/writ petitioner be kept under suspension during the pendency of such fresh proceedings.2. One Ajit Kumar Bhattacharjee, since deceased, was an employee of South Bengal State Transport Corporation which is a Statutory Body. The said Ajit Kumar Bhattacharjee expired on July 1, 1996. After his expiry, appropriate application had been made for substitution and the present appellants had been substituted in place and stead of Ajit Kumar Bhattacharjee.3. While the said Ajit Kumar was in service in South Bengal State Transport Corporation, certain charges were framed against him and a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. In the said disciplinary proceeding Ajit Kumar was found guilty of the cha...
Canara Bank and ors. Vs. Sri Debasis Das
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1999
Reported in: (2000)2CALLT170(HC)
S.K. Sen, J. 1. This appeal is directed against a Judgment and order dated 30th November, 1998 passed by learned single Judge whereby the writ petition was allowed and the order of the appellate authority, the order of the Disciplinary Authority as also the findings of the Enquiry Officer were set aside and the following directions were passed :--'As agreed to by the counsel for the parties, for the purpose of examining genuineness of the documents produced before this Court by Mr. Sengupta, the documents may now be sent to the Government handwriting and questioned Documents Expert, whose report may be taken into consideration. All the disputed documents shall be sent to the Government Handwriting and Questioned Documents Expert. Parties shall be at liberty to submit their written briefs upon receipt of the report of the said expert At the request of this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner as also the respondent bank had put their Initials on the said documents. Parties, if they...
Bengal Non-ferrous Metal Industries Vs. Smt. Mohini Todi and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1999
Reported in: (1999)2CALLT469(HC)
D.B. Dutta. J.1. The present application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure ts directed against order No. 373 dated 20th November, 1998 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division. 2nd Court, Howrah in Title Suit No. 73 of 1989. It was a suit for recovery of khas possession upon determination of a tenancy under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act The suit was not instituted on any of the grounds referred to in section 13 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act. The original defendant on filling a written statement contended, inter alia, that the tenancy is governed by the provisions of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act and not by the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act. An application under section 17(2)(2A) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act was filed on behalf of the defendant Subsequently the original defendant died and the present respondents/opposite parties were brought on record as his heirs and legal representatives. The application unde...
Canara Bank and ors. Vs. Sri Debasis Das Overruled
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-04-1999
Reported in: (2000)2CALLT170(HC); (1999)ILR2Cal469
S.K. Sen, J.1. This appeal is directed against a Judgment and order dated 30th November, 1998 passed by learned single Judge whereby the writ petition was allowed and the order of the appellate authority, the order of the Disciplinary Authority as also the findings of the Enquiry Officer were set aside and the following directions were passed :--"As agreed to by the counsel for the parties, for the purpose of examining genuineness of the documents produced before this Court by Mr. Sengupta, the documents may now be sent to the Government handwriting and questioned Documents Expert, whose report may be taken into consideration. All the disputed documents shall be sent to the Government Handwriting and Questioned Documents Expert. Parties shall be at liberty to submit their written briefs upon receipt of the report of the said expert At the request of this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner as also the respondent bank had put their Initials on the said documents. Parties, if they ...
Raj Kapoor Ram Vs. South Bengal State Transport Corpn. and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-01-1999
Reported in: (2000)1CALLT379(HC)
A. Lala, J.1. The writ petitioner, while performing his duty as Conductor of a vehicle No. WB-39/2140 on the routs of Durgapur to Digha under the South Bengal State Transport Corporation levelled with following three charges :(a) Allowing Intentionally 3 (three) passengers to travel in his bus without any ticket;(b) Excess amount of Rs. 132.10 was found in the collection bag;(c) Careless and negligent while performing his duty.2. On the basis of such charges an Enquiry Officer was appointed and it appears the enquiry report was submitted by 16th September, 1997.3. The petitioner made this writ petition claiming, inter alia. writ of mandamus to cancel, rescind, revoke the purported chargesheet dated 31st March, 1997 and the enquiry proceeding conducted by the Enquiry Officer and not to give any effect or further effect to the final order of punishment. if passed, etc.4. The petitioner, in fact, averted that petitioner has not been supplied a copy of the enquiry report nor any second sho...
A B S Marine Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Indian Bank and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Apr-01-1999
Reported in: (1999)2CALLT247(HC)
The Court 1. The suit, as per cause list, was appearing in the list of this court under the heading of 'For hearing' quite sometime.2. The suit was dismissed for default on 26th February 1999 when neither of the parties appeared before this court even in the third call.3. At the time of rising of the court at 4-15 P.M. of the day, in an unusual time, learned Advocate for the plaintiff mentioned the matter to recall the order of dismissal of the suit only taking the name and absence of the appearing of a senior counsel of this court since it was not the proper time for mentioning nor court should run its administration only on the name and absence of the senior counsel, the court was pleased to direct to mention on the following day as and when court takes mentioning of the matters.4. On the following day learned Advocate again mentioned taking the name of self-same senior counsel and his absence and prayed for recallingof the order as if the name of the counsel will serve the purpose o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »